Agenda

Minutes/Conclusions Reached

Agenda review:

Add tooling discussion to Thursday

Hot topics and objectives for the week

Readiness for July Freeze

Progress on QA/FMM levels

Content for July freeze due by midnight Eastern on 2016-07-24. Discussion over FMM levels expected by then. Would be good to know by Thursday what FMM level the WGs expect to achieve. Reviewed some of the survey responses. Lloyd will run some calculations from the survey for further discussion.

Other messaging to WGs:

Lloyd will put something together regarding the reports being emailed out.

General concerns/issues.

Lorraine: We should refresh them on QA criteria.

Interim deadlines? When do we want to cut off new resources for STU 3? Decision to make that date for new proposals 2016-05-31. Anyone with outstanding proposals should work with the FMG to get them resolved.

Should we talk to them about evaluating Gforge and alternative solutions? Discussion over status of PSS. Lorraine believes it is at EST. Lloyd expects to test for the September ballot. Lloyd will highlight to cochairs that it is a possibility. If WGs want to comment to FMG, they should contact FMG or Lloyd by 2016-06-01.

Should ask for a heads up from WGs if they are planning any new resources.

Connectathon track proposals for September will also be due 2016-06-01

Anne to figure out where the PSS is for the gforge evaluation project

What are we doing around Consent?

Grahame: Feedback from implementers that treating Consent as a contract is in disagreement with reasonable expectations. Committee owning consent disagrees with implementers. Grahame thinks it would be better to focus on the semantics but committee is resistant. Discussion over testing it at Connectathon. Lorraine: What is the process for escalating and resolving an issue like this? Lloyd: Raise it at WG, raise it at FMG. We have so far only raised it informally. We don’t have formal statements from the implementer committee, but there are some emails. We could encourage them to create an alternative and see which one survives. FMG could insert a comment in the ballot; if it goes with a single approach, the best we could get is a bunch of negative ballots. If we go into ballot with two approaches, it allows for the possibility of the community choosing a winner. Discussion over when/where to discuss with WG. Grahame isn’t sure we want a ballot bakeoff. Lloyd: If we do it at Connectathon it would be good to have it in the ballot release. We don’t have a WGM session with them at which we could discuss this. Joint meetings on Monday and Tuesday Q4 and Wednesday Q3. Grahame suggests encouraging people in blog post to contact him with concerns, encourage the committee to create both options and set up a Connectathon track on Consent functionality.

Calvin notes that the PLA is ready to have us move forward with a CDA product family. Raises issue that FHIR and CDA product families touch. What happens to profiles in CDA that are also FHIR? We need to acknowledge this overlap and think about how to navigate. It’s possible that a group will have to wear two hats. Lloyd thinks this issue will be managed fairly easily, but expresses concern about setting a precedent for creating other families that are cross-syntax in nature.

This Connectathon has 120 registrants. Grahame thinks there is a possibility for up to 200 in Baltimore.

FMG lunch tomorrow: add planning for group that large. Brian Pech notes that the hotel is near the convention center.